Goodreads Librarians Group discussion

54 views
Policies & Practices > Combining "Adaptations"

Comments Showing 1-15 of 15 (15 new)    post a comment »
dateDown arrow    newest »

message 1: by rivka, Librarian Moderator (new)

rivka | 36337 comments Mod
That makes sense to me. If the reason they shouldn't be combined is that they are not truly that author's work (or not primarily), then perhaps that author shouldn't be the primary listed author.


message 2: by John (new)

John | 73 comments My idea would be to change the binding line to "graphic adaptation". That would steer me clear of combining it whereas (the current) paperback would lead me to believe it's just another copy of the same book. Make sense?


message 3: by Rindis (new)

Rindis | 20 comments If you were to do that, I'd say 'Graphic novel', not 'Graphic adaptation', there's no real reason to separate it out from all the other graphic novels. And, what do mark it if there hardcover and a paperback version of the graphic novel?

And, yeah, the last time I brought it up, there was resistance to making the binding entries much more complicated than 'Paperback' and 'Hardcover'.

http://www.goodreads.com/topic/show_g...


message 4: by rivka, Librarian Moderator (new)

rivka | 36337 comments Mod
Abigail, I don't think you can change other people's reviews/ratings to another edition -- and that's probably a good thing. I wouldn't want someone switching mine, even if they were convinced I were wrong. (And even if they were correct.)

Personally, I don't think there's anything wrong with adding more information to the binding entry, as long as it still has the basic info. Maybe "Paperback (Graphic Novel)" would do the trick?

However, I still think switching the author order is the best way to keep such books from being accidentally recombined by another librarian who fails to notice the binding info (like, um, me :o ).


message 5: by John (new)

John | 73 comments I mentioned the binding issue because that's what the combiner sees when deciding whether that specific "work" should go with the others of the same name. To be brutally honest, if I saw "graphic novel" prior to reading this thread, I would likely have assumed that the text was the same and combined it; that's why I suggested making it clearer the work is adapted.


message 6: by Otis, Chief Architect (new)

Otis Chandler | 315 comments Mod
I think we may eventually need a way to 'freeze' a book from being combined/separated and only allow super-librarians to edit it.

In the meantime, putting the author as a secondary author or even not listing them should do the trick.

Reading the reviews on Metamorphosis it does appear most people thought they were reviewing the book, so we switched most reviews to a real edition. We've only done this a rare number of times as which edition someone reviews is definitely up to them, but in this case it felt like the right thing to do. Let me know if I've had too much egg-nog :)

And yes, we were happy to add Rivka as a moderator - she was essentially doing it anyways, and has always added thoughtful and smart comments. She has no official affiliation with Goodreads, so we're very grateful for all her help!


message 7: by rivka, Librarian Moderator (last edited Dec 26, 2007 06:28PM) (new)

rivka | 36337 comments Mod
". . . too much egg-nog" -- there is no such thing! Silly Otis. ;)

GoodReads has quickly become one of my most favoritest internet places ever. :D So I'm happy to do whatever I can to keep it a great place. :)


message 8: by Caroline (new)

Caroline | 58 comments Thanks, Otis! I was wondering why Metamorphosis showed up at the top of my update feed yesterday, and thought maybe I was losing my mind. >.> I must have reviewed the graphic novel by mistake, so that's much appreciated since I never have read the graphic adaptation!


message 9: by rivka, Librarian Moderator (new)

rivka | 36337 comments Mod
Oh! THAT is why half of my friends suddenly had a yen for Kafka yesterday!

I was wondering . . .


message 10: by Saturnina (new)

Saturnina | 12 comments Referring to message 10 by Otis, I also noticed there are some mistaken reviews at Mary Wollstonecraft's combined edition of Mary, a fiction and Maria, or The Wrongs of Woman, referring to only Maria. Earlier all the editions of Maria were combined with Mary and combined editions of Maria and Mary, but I separated them to three categories.


message 11: by Melissa (new)

Melissa (mahart) | 6 comments Any group feeling on un-combining Coraline from the graphic novel version Coraline Graphic Novel Edition? Although the graphic novel is a fairly faithful adaptation, I actually have two distinct opinions on each work, and would like to be able to rate them separately, which you don't seem able to do if they're combined. Thoughts?


message 12: by Lisa (last edited Nov 21, 2008 02:55PM) (new)

Lisa Vegan (lisavegan) | 2400 comments Melissa, Personal feeling: In this case I do not recommend combining. I consider them separate books. Just my opinion.

Edit: I've read just the non-graphic version but I'd think the graphic novel would feel different enough for me to say they should stay separate. I've always made a point to not combine them.


message 13: by Cait (new)

Cait (tigercait) | 5005 comments Melissa, you can rate two combined editions of the same book separately, but I agree that in this case those are not the same book anyway.


message 14: by Ashley (new)

Ashley (ashleym) | 147 comments I don't think they should be combined either. Every now and then I've been going back and checking on that one, and separating them if they've been recombined (which happens quite often).


message 15: by Melissa (new)

Melissa (mahart) | 6 comments Thanks for cleaning that up, and for the clarification.


back to top